Skip to main content

Full text of "Ethiopia and the Origin of Civilization"

See other formats


Ethiopia  and  the  Origin  of  Civilization 

A  Critical  Review  of  the  Evidence  of  Archaeology,  Anthropology,  History 
and  Comparative  Religion:  According  to  the  Most  Reliable  Sources  and 
Authorities 

By  John  G.  Jackson  (1939) 


"It  is  pretty  well  settled  that  the  city  is  the  Negro's  great  contribution  to  civilization,  for  it  was  in 
Africa  where  the  first  cities  grew  up."  E.  Haldeman-Julius 

"Those  piles  of  ruins  which  you  see  in  that  narrow  valley  watered  by  the  Nile,  are  the  remains  of 
opulent  cities,  the  pride  of  the  ancient  kingdom  of  Ethiopia.  ...  There  a  people,  now  forgotten, 
discovered  while  others  were  yet  barbarians,  the  elements  of  the  arts  and  sciences.  A  race  of 
men  now  rejected  from  society  for  their  sable  skin  and  frizzled  hair,  founded  on  the  study  of  the 
laws  of  nature,  those  civil  and  religious  systems  which  still  govern  the  universe."  Count  Volney 

"The  accident  of  the  predominance  of  white  men  in  modern  times  should  not  give  us  supercilious 
ideas  about  color  or  persuade  us  to  listen  to  superficial  theories  about  the  innate  superiority  of  the 
white-skinned  man.  Four  thousand  years  ago,  when  civilization  was  already  one  or  two  thousand 
years  old,  white  men  were  just  a  bunch  of  semi-savages  on  the  outskirts  of  the  civilized  world.  If 
there  had  been  anthropologists  in  Crete,  Egypt,  and  Babylonia,  they  would  have  pronounced  the 
white  race  obviously  inferior,  and  might  have  discoursed  learnedly  on  the  superior  germ-plasm  or 
glands  of  colored  folk."  Joseph  McCabe 


The  late  Professor  George  A.  Dorsey  noted  that  "H.  G.  Wells'  heart  beats  faster  in  nearly 
every  chapter  of  his  Outline  of  History,  because  he  cannot  forget  that  he  is  Nordic,  Aryan, 
English  British,  white,  civilized."  (Why  We  Behave  Like  Human  Beings,  p.  40.)  This 
patriotic  zeal  of  Mr.  Wells'  has,  in  truth,  caused  him  to  suppress  certain  facts  that  do  not 
fit  into  his  pet  theories.  In  the  latest  edition  of  his  Outline  of  History,  Mr.  Wells  ends  his 
chapter  on  The  Early  Empires  with  the  following  remarks:  "No  less  an  authority  than  Sir 
Flinders  Petrie  gives  countenance  to  the  idea  that  there  was  some  very  early  connection 
between  Colchis  (the  country  to  the  south  of  the  Caucasus)  and  prehistoric  Egypt. 
Herodotus  remarked  upon  a  series  of  resemblances  between  the  Colchians  and  the 
Egyptians."  (Wells'  New  and  Revised  Outline  of  History,  p.  184,  Garden  City,  1931.)  It 
would  have  been  proper  for  Wells  to  have  quoted  the  remarks  of  Herodotus,  so  as  to  give 
us  precise  information  on  the  series  of  resemblances  between  the  Cholchians  and  the 
Egyptians.  Why  he  did  not  do  so  we  shall  now  see.  In  Book  II,  Section- 104,  of  his 
celebrated  History,  Herodotus  states:  "For  my  part  I  believe  the  Colchi  to  be  a  colony  of 
Egyptians,  because  like  them  they  have  black  skins  and  frizzled  hair."  (See  any  English 
translation  of  The  History  of  Herodotus.  The  translation  by  Professor  George  Rawlinson 
is  the  best.  See  also  W.E.B.  DuBois,  The  Negro,  p.  31,  and  Count  Volney's  Travels  in 
Egypt  and  Syria,  Vol.  I.  pp.  80-81.)  After  discussing  the  civilizations  of  Egypt, 


Babylonia  and  India,  Wells  had  already  referred  to  them  as  a  "triple  system  of  white  man 
civilizations."  (Outline  of  History,  Chap.  XIII,  Sect.  5,  p.  175)  On  concluding  that  the 
civilization  of  Egypt  was  a  white  man  civilization,  he  naturally  would  be  careful  not  to 
quote  the  above  passage  from  Herodotus. 

Most  history  texts,  especially  the  ones  on  ancient  history,  start  off  by  telling  us  that  there 
are  either  three,  four  or  five  races  of  man,  but  that  of  those  races  only  one  has  been 
responsible  for  civilization,  culture,  progress  and  all  other  good  things.  The  one  race  is  of 
course  the  white  race,  and  particularly  that  branch  of  said  race  known  as  the  Nordic  or 
Aryan.  The  reason  for  this  is  obvious;  the  writers  of  these  textbooks  are  as  a  rule  Nordics, 
or  so  consider  themselves.  However,  prejudice  alone  will  not  account  for  this  sort  of 
thing.  There  is  a  confusion  among  historians  and  anthropologists  concerning  the  proper 
classification  of  races,  and  this  confusion  is  used  by  biased  writers  to  bolster  up  their 
preconceptions.  It  is  therefore  necessary  that  we  discuss  the  subject  of  race  classification 
in  a  rational  manner  before  proceeding  further. 

The  early  scientific  classifications  of  the  varieties  of  the  human  species  were 
geographical  in  nature.  The  celebrated  naturalist,  Linneaus  (1708-1778),  for  instance, 
listed  four  races,  according  to  continent,  namely:  (1)  European  (white),  (2)  African 
(black),  (3)  Asiatic  (yellow),  and  (4)  American  (red).  Blumenback,  in  1775,  added  a  fifth 
type,  the  Ocieanic  or  brown  race.  This  classification  is  still  used  in  some  grammar  school 
Geographies,  where  the  races  of  man  are  tabulated  as:  Ethiopian  (black),  Caucasian 
(white),  American  (red),  Mongolian  (yellow)  and  Malayan  (brown).  During  the  year 
1 800,  the  French  naturalist,  Cuvier,  announced  the  hypothesis  that  all  ethnic  types  were 
traceable  to  Ham,  Chem  and  Japhet,  the  three  sons  of  Noah.  After  that  date  race 
classification  developed  into  an  amazing  contest;  a  struggle  which  still  rages.  By  1873, 
Haeckel  had  found  no  less  than  twelve  distinct  races  of  mankind;  and  to  show  the 
indefatigable  nature  of  his  researches,  he  annexed  twenty-two  more  races  a  few  years 
later,  bringing  the  grand  total  of  human  types  up  to  thirty-four.  Deniker,  in  1900, 
presented  to  the  world  a  very  imposing  system  of  race  classification.  He  conceived  of  the 
human  species  existing  in  the  form  of  six  grand  divisions,  seventeen  divisions  and 
twenty-nine  races.  And  despite  all  this  industry  among  anthropologists,  ethnologists  and 
the  like,  there  is  yet  no  agreement  on  the  classification  of  races.  Where  one 
anthropologist  finds  three  racial  types,  another  can  spot  thirty-three  without  the  least 
difficulty. 

The  Classifiers  of  race,  however,  regardless  of  how  abundantly  they  disagreed  with  each 
other  as  to  the  correct  groupings  of  human  types,  were  of  unanimous  accord  in  the  belief 
that  the  white  peoples  of  the  world  were  far  superior  to  the  darker  races.  This  opinion  in 
still  very  popular,  but  modern  science  is  making  it  hard  for  intelligent  people  to  accept 
the  fallacy.  Many  years  ago  the  German  philosopher,  Schopenhauer,  remarked  that, 
"there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  white  race,  much  as  this  is  talked  of,  but  every  white  man  is  a 
faded  or  bleached  one."  Schopenhauer  possessed  keen  and  sagacious  foresight  on  this 
point.  For  example,  the  English  scholar,  Joseph  McCabe,  expresses  the  following  view  as 
the  consensus  of  opinion  among  modern  anthropologists:  "There  is  strong  reason  to  think 
that  man  was  at  first  very  dark  of  skin,  woolly-haired  and  flat-nosed,  and,  as  he  wandered 


into  different  climates,  the  branches  of  the  race  diverged  and  developed  their 
characteristics."  (Key  to  Culture,  No.  11,  p.  10.) 

Professor  Franz  Boas,  the  nestor  of  American  anthropologists,  has  divided  the  whole 
human  race  into  only  two  divisions.  This  classification  of  Boas'  is  admirably  explained 
by  Professor  George  A.  Dorsey: 

Open  your  atlas  to  a  map  of  the  world.  Look  at  the  Indian  Ocean:  on  the 
west,  Africa;  on  the  north,  the  three  great  southern  peninsulas  of  Asia:  on 
the  east,  a  chain  of  great  islands  terminating  in  Australia.  Wherever  that 
Indian  Ocean  touches  land,  it  finds  dark-skinned  people  with  strongly 
developed  jaws,  relatively  long  arms  and  kinky  or  frizzly  hair.  Call  that 
the  Indian  Ocean  or  Negroid  division  of  the  human  race. 

Now  look  at  the  Pacific  Ocean:  on  one  side,  the  two  Americas;  on  the 
other,  Asia.  (Geographically,  Europe  is  a  tail  to  the  Asiatic  kite.)  The 
aboriginal  population  of  the  Americas  and  of  Asia  north  of  its  southern 
peninsula  was  a  light-skinned  people  with  straight  hair,  relatively  short 
arms,  and  a  face  without  prominent  jaws.  Call  that  the  Pacific  Ocean  or 
Mongoloid  division.  (Why  We  Behave  Like  Human  Beings,  pp.  44-45.) 

Professors  A.  L.  Kroeber  and  Fay-Cooper  Cole  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  peoples  of 
Europe  have  (been)  bleached  out  enough  to  merit  classification  as  a  distinct  race.  This 
would  add  a  European  or  Caucasoid  division  to  the  Negroid  and  Mongoloid  races  of  the 
classification  proposed  by  Professor  Boas.  If  we  accept  this  three-fold  division  of  the 
human  species,  our  classification  ought  to  read  as  follows:  the  races  of  man  are  three  in 
number;  (1)  the  Negroid,  or  Ethiopian  or  black  race;  (2)  the  Mongoloid,  or  Mongolian  or 
yellow  race;  and  (3)  the  Caucasoid  or  European  or  white  race.  This  is  the  very  latest 
scheme  of  race  classification. 

Now  that  we  have  straightened  out  ourselves  on  the  issue  of  the  classification  of  races, 
we  may  property  turn  to  the  main  subject  matter  of  this  essay,  i.e.,  the  ancient  Ethiopians 
and  their  widespread  influence  on  the  early  history  of  civilization.  In  discussing  the  origin 
of  civilization  in  the  ancient  Near  East,  Professor  Charles  Seignobos  in  his  History  of 
Ancient  Civilization,  notes  that  the  first  civilized  inhabitants  of  the  Nile  and  Tigris- 
Euphrates  valleys,  were  a  dark-skinned  people  with  short  hair  and  prominent  lips;  and 
that  they  are  referred  to  by  some  scholars  as  Cushites  (Ethiopians),  and  as  Hamites  by 
others.  This  ancient  civilization  of  the  Cushites,  out  of  which  the  earliest  cultures  of 
Egypt  and  Mesopotamia  grew,  was  not  confined  to  the  Near  East.  Traces  of  it  have  been 
found  all  over  the  world.  Dr.  W.  J.  Perry  refers  to  it  as  the  Archaic  Civilization.  Sir 
Grafton  Elliot  Smith  terms  it  the  Neolithic  Heliolithic  Culture  of  the  Brunet-Browns.  Mr. 
Wells  alludes  to  this  early  civilization  in  his  Outline  of  History,  and  dates  its  beginnings 
as  far  back  as  15,000  years  B.C.  "This  peculiar  development  of  the  Neolithic  culture," 
says  Mr.  Wells,  "which  Elliot  Smith  called  the  Heliolithic  (sun-stone)  culture,  included 
many  or  all  of  the  following  odd  practices:  (1)  Circumcision,  (2)  the  queer  custom  of 
sending  the  father  to  bed  when  a  child  is  born,  known  as  Couvade,  (3)  the  practice  of 


Massage,  (4)  the  making  of  Mummies,  (5)  Megalithic  monuments  (i.e.  Stonehenge),  (6) 
artificial  deformation  of  the  heads  of  the  young  by  bandages,  (7)  Tattooing,  (8)  religious 
association  of  the  Sun  and  the  Serpent,  and  (9)  the  use  of  the  symbol  known  as  the 
Swastika  for  good  luck.  . . .  Elliot  Smith  traces  these  associated  practices  in  a  sort  of 
constellation  all  over  this  great  Mediterranean  /  Indian  Ocean-Pacific  area.  Where  one 
occurs,  most  of  the  others  occur.  They  link  Brittany  with  Borneo  and  Peru.  But  this 
constellation  of  practices  does  not  crop  up  in  the  primitive  home  of  Nordic  or  Mongolian 
peoples,  nor  does  it  extend  southward  much  beyond  equatorial  Africa.  ...  The  first 
civilizations  in  Egypt  and  the  Euphrates-Tigris  valley  probably  developed  directly  out  of 
this  widespread  culture."  (Outline  of  History,  pp.  141-143). 

This  ancient  civilization  is  called  NEOLITHIC  by  Wells.  This  is  a  mistake;  for  we  have 
overwhelming  evidence  that  these  ancient  peoples  had  long  passed  out  of  the  New  Stone 
Age  stage  of  culture,  and  were  erecting  edifices  which  could  only  have  been  constructed 
by  means  of  hard  metal  tools.  Iron  is  the  very  backbone  of  civilization,  and  the  Iron  Age 
began  very  anciently  in  Africa.  The  researches  of  scholars  like  Boas,  Torday  and  DuBois 
would  lead  us  to  believe  that  the  art  of  mining  iron  was  first  developed  in  the  interior  of 
Africa,  and  that  the  knowledge  of  it  passed  through  Egypt  to  the  rest  of  the  world.  (See 
W.E.B.  DuBois,  The  Negro,  pp.  114-116,  Home  University  Library,  New  York  and 
London,  1915.) 

In  modern  geography  the  name  Ethiopia  is  confined  to  the  country  known  as  Abyssinia, 
an  extensive  territory  in  East  Africa.  In  ancient  times  Ethiopia  extended  over  vast 
domains  in  both  Africa  and  Asia.  "It  seems  certain,"  declares  Sir  E.  A.  Wallis  Budge, 
"that  classical  historians  and  geographers  called  the  whole  region  from  India  to  Egypt, 
both  countries  inclusive,  by  the  name  of  Ethiopia,  and  in  consequence  they  regarded  all 
the  dark-skinned  and  black  peoples  who  inhabited  it  as  Ethiopians.  Mention  is  made  of 
Eastern  and  Western  Ethiopians  and  it  is  probable  that  the  Easterners  were  Asiatics  and 
the  Westerners  Africans."  (History  of  Ethiopia,  Vol.  I.,  Preface,  by  Sir  E.  A.  Wallis 
Budge.)  In  addition  Budge  notes  that,  "Homer  and  Herodotus  call  all  the  peoples  of  the 
Sudan,  Egypt,  Arabia,  Palestine  and  Western  Asia  and  India  Ethiopians."  (Ibid.,  p.  2.) 
Herodotus  wrote  in  his  celebrated  History  that  both  the  Western  Ethiopians,  who  lived  in 
Africa,  and  the  Eastern  Ethiopians  who  dwelled  in  India,  were  black  in  complexion,  but 
that  the  Africans  had  curly  hair,  while  the  Indians  were  straight-haired.  (The  aboriginal 
black  inhabitants  of  India  are  generally  referred  to  as  the  Dravidians,  of  whom  more  will 
be  said  as  we  proceed.)  Another  classical  historian  who  wrote  about  the  Ethiopians  was 
Strabo,  from  whom  we  quote  the  following:  "I  assert  that  the  ancient  Greeks,  in  the  same 
way  as  they  classed  all  the  northern  nations  with  which  they  were  familiar  as  Scythians, 
etc.,  so,  I  affirm,  they  designated  as  Ethiopia  the  whole  of  the  southern  countries  toward 
the  ocean."  Strabo  adds  that  "if  the  moderns  have  confined  the  appellation  Ethiopians  to 
those  only  who  dwell  near  Egypt,  this  must  not  be  allowed  to  interfere  with  the  meaning 
of  the  ancients."  Ephorus  says  that:  "The  Ethiopians  were  considered  as  occupying  all  the 
south  coasts  of  both  Asia  and  Africa,"  and  adds  that  "this  is  an  ancient  opinion  of  the  of 
the  Greeks."  Then  we  have  the  view  of  Stephanus  of  Byzantium,  that:  "Ethiopia  was  the 
first  established  country  on  earth;  and  the  Ethiopians  were  the  first  who  introduced  the 
worship  of  the  gods,  and  who  established  laws."  The  vestiges  of  this  early  civilization 


have  been  found  in  Nubia,  the  Egyptian  Sudan,  West  Africa,  Egypt,  Mashonaland,  India, 
Persia,  Mesopotamia,  Arabia,  South  America,  Central  America,  Mexico,  and  the  United 
States.  Any  student  who  doubts  this  will  find  ample  evidence  in  such  works  as  The  Voice 
of  Africa,  by  Dr.  Leo  Froebenius;  Prehistoric  Nations,  and  Ancient  America,  by  John  D. 
Baldwin;  Rivers  of  Life,  by  Major-General  J.  G.  R.  Forlong;  A  Book  of  the  Beginnings  by 
Gerald  Massey;  Children  of  the  Sun  and  The  Growth  of  Civilization,  by  W.  J.  Perry;  The 
Negro  by  Professor  W.E.B.  DuBois;  The  Anacalypsis,  by  Sir  Godfrey  Higgins;  Isis 
Unveiled  by  Madam  H.  P.  Blavatsky;  The  Diffusion  of  Culture,  by  Sir  Grafton  Elliot 
Smith;  The  Mediterranean  Race,  by  Professor  Sergi;  The  Ruins  of  Empires,  by  Count 
Volney;  The  Races  of  Europe,  by  Professor  William  Z.  Ripley;  and  last  but  not  least,  the 
brilliant  monographs  of  Mr.  Maynard  Shipley:  New  Light  on  Prehistoric  Cultures  and 
Americans  of  a  Million  Years  Age.  (See  also  Shipley's  Sex  and  the  Garden  of  Eden  Myth, 
a  collection  of  essays,  the  best  of  the  lot  being  one  entitled:  Christian  Doctrines  In  Pre- 
Christian  America.)  These  productions  of  Mr.  Shipley,  have  been  issued  in  pamphlet 
form  in  the  Little  Blue  Book  Series,  published  by  Mr.  E.  Haldeman- Julius,  of  Girard, 
Kansas. 

The  efforts  of  certain  historians  to  classify  these  ancient  Cushites  as  Caucasoids  does  not 
deceive  honest  historical  students  any  longer.  This  may  well  be  illustrated  by  a  passage 
from  the  pen  of  our  scholarly  friend  Bishop  William  Montgomery  Brown:  "For  the  first 
two  or  three  thousand  years  of  civilization,  there  was  not  a  civilized  white  man  on  the 
earth.  Civilization  was  founded  and  developed  by  the  swarthy  races  of  Mesopotamia, 
Syria  and  Egypt,  and  the  white  race  remained  so  barbaric  that  in  those  days  an  Egyptian 
or  a  Babylonian  priest  would  have  said  that  the  riffraff  of  white  tribes  a  few  hundred 
miles  to  the  north  of  their  civilization  were  hopelessly  incapable  of  acquiring  the 
knowledge  requisite  to  progress.  It  was  southern  colored  peoples  everywhere,  in  China, 
in  Central  America,  in  India,  Mesopotamia,  Syria,  Egypt  and  Crete  who  gave  the 
northern  white  peoples  civilization."  (The  Bankruptcy  of  Christian  Supernaturalism,  Vol., 
p.  192.) 

Quite  a  few  Egyptologists  have  defended  the  idea  that  the  ancient  Egyptians 
originally  came  from  Asia.  There  never  was  any  evidence  to  back  up  this  view;  and  the 
only  reason  it  was  adopted,  was  because  it  was  fashionable  to  believe  that  no  African 
people  was  capable  of  developing  a  great  civilization.  Geoffrey  Parsons  refers  to 
Egyptian  civilization  in  his  Stream  of  History,  p.  154,  New  York  &  London,  1932,  as 
"genuinely  African  in  its  origin  and  development."  Herodotus  came  to  the  same 
conclusion  over  2,000  years  ago,  but  he  is  not  taken  seriously  by  the  majority  of  modern 
historians,  except  where  his  facts  agree  with  certain  theories  of  said  historians.  Theories 
are  more  precious  to  some  scholars  than  facts,  even  when  the  facts  flatly  contradict  their 
theories.  Dr.  Froebenious,  the  great  German  anthropologist,  has  examined  the  ruins  of 
ancient  cultures  in  southern,  eastern  and  western  Africa,  of  an  antiquity  rivaling  those  of 
Egypt  and  Sumer.  Sir  John  Marshall  and  Dr.  E.  Mackay  have  uncovered  the  remains  of  a 
great  Dravidian  civilization  in  India,  which  rose  to  its  peak  over  5,000  years  ago.  The 
newspaper  generally  report  these  discoveries  as  startling  and  unexpected.  They  tell  us 
that  nobody  ever  dreamed  that  these  ancient  nations  ever  existed.  This  novelty,  however, 
does  not  exist  for  real  students.  Anyone  familiar  with  the  works  of  G.  Elliot  Smith,  W.  J. 


Perry,  Sir  Godfrey  Higgins,  Dr.  H.R.  Hall,  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson,  John  D.  Baldwin, 
Gerald  Massey  and  General  Forlong,  will  not  be  surprised  at  the  very  novel 
archaeological  discoveries  announced  by  the  press.  Since  we  are  dealing  with  historical 
sources  and  authorities,  a  study  of  the  researches  of  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson,  the  Father  of 
Assyriology,  on  the  Ethiopians  in  the  ancient  East,  is  in  order.  The  following  extract  is 
condensed  from  an  essay  entitled:  On  the  Early  History  of  Babylonia: 

1 .  The  system  of  writing  which  they  brought  with  them  has  the  closest 
affinity  with  that  of  Egypt — in  many  cases  indeed,  there  is  an  absolute 
identity  between  the  two  alphabets. 

2.  In  the  Biblical  genealogies,  Cush  (Ethiopia)  and  Mizraim  (Egypt)  are 
brothers,  while  from  the  former  sprang  Nimrod  (Babylonia.) 

3.  In  regard  to  the  language  of  the  primitive  Babylonians,  the  vocabulary  is 
undoubtedly  Cushite  or  Ethiopian,  belonging  to  that  stock  of  tongues 
which  in  the  sequel  were  everywhere  more  or  less  mixed  up  with  the 
Semitic  languages,  but  of  which  we  have  probably  the  purest  modern 
specimens  in  the  Mahra  of  Southern  Arabia  and  the  Galla  of  Abyssinia. 

4.  All  the  traditions  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria  point  to  a  connection  in  very 
early  times  between  Ethiopia,  Southern  Arabia  and  the  cities  on  the  lower 
Euphrates. 

5.  In  further  proof  of  the  connection  between  Ethiopia  and  Chaldea,  we  must 
remember  the  Greek  tradition  both  of  Cepheus  and  Memnon,  which 
sometimes  applied  to  Africa,  and  sometimes  to  the  countries  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Euphrates;  and  we  must  also  consider  the  geographical  names  of 
Cush  and  Phut,  which,  although  of  African  origin,  are  applied  to  races 
bordering  on  Chaldea,  both  in  the  Bible  and  in  the  Inscriptions  of  Darius. 
(Essay- VI,  Appendix,  Book-I,  History  of  Herodotus,  translated  by 
Professor  George  Rawlinson,  with  essays  and  notes  by  Sir  Henry 
Rawlinson  and  Sir  J.  G.  Wilkinson.) 

The  opinions  of  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson  are  reinforced  by  the  researches  of  his  equally 
distinguished  brother,  Professor  George  Rawlinson,  in  his  essay  On  the  Ethnic  Affinities 
of  the  Races  of  Western  Asia,  which  directs  our  attention  to:  "the  uniform  voice  of 
primitive  antiquity,  which  spoke  of  the  Ethiopians  as  a  single  race,  dwelling  along  the 
shores  of  the  Southern  Ocean  from  India  to  the  Pillars  of  Hercules."  {Herodotus,  Vol.  I., 
Book.  I.,  Appendix,  Essay  XL,  Section-5.)  Rawlinson  adds  an  explanatory  note  to  this 
section  of  his  essay,  which  we  here  reproduce:  "Recent  linguistic  discovery  tends  to  show 
that  a  Cushite  or  Ethiopian  race  did  in  the  earliest  times  extend  itself  along  the  shores  of 
the  Southern  Ocean  from  Abyssinia  to  India.  The  whole  peninsula  of  India  was  peopled 
by  a  race  of  their  character  before  the  influx  of  the  Aryans;  it  extended  from  the  Indus 
along  the  seacoast  through  the  modern  Beluchistan  and  Kerman,  which  was  the  proper 
country  of  the  Asiatic  Ethiopians;  the  cities  on  the  northern  shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf  are 
shown  by  the  brick  inscriptions  found  among  their  ruins  to  have  belonged  to  this  race;  it 
was  dominant  in  Susiana  and  Babylonia,  until  overpowered  in  the  one  country  by  Aryan, 
in  the  other  by  Semitic  intrusion;  it  can  be  traced  both  by  dialect  and  tradition  throughout 
the  whole  south  coast  of  the  Arabian  peninsula." 


In  the  study  of  ancient  affairs,  folklore  and  tradition  throw  an  invaluable  light  on 
historical  records.  In  Greek  mythology  we  read  of  the  great  Ethiopian  king,  Cepheus, 
whose  fame  was  so  great  that  he  and  his  family  were  immortalized  in  the  stars.  The  wife 
of  King  Cepheus  was  Queen  Cassiopeia,  and  his  daughter,  Princess  Andromeda.  The  star 
groups  of  the  celestial  sphere,  which  are  named  after  them  are  called  the  ROYAL 
family — (the  constellations:  cepheus,  CASSIOPEIA  and  ANDROMEDA.)  It  may  seem 
strange  that  legendary  rulers  of  ancient  Ethiopia  should  still  have  their  names  graven  on 
our  star  maps,  but  the  voice  of  history  gives  us  a  clue.  A  book  on  astrology  attributed  to 
Lucian  declares  that:  "The  Ethiopians  were  the  first  who  invented  the  science  of  stars, 
and  gave  names  to  the  planets,  not  at  random  and  without  meaning,  but  descriptive  of  the 
qualities  which  they  conceived  them  to  possess;  and  it  was  from  them  that  this  art  passed, 
still  in  an  imperfect  state,  to  the  Egyptians."  The  Ethiopian  origin  of  astronomy  is 
beautifully  explained  by  Count  Volney  in  a  passage  in  his  Ruins  of  Empires,  which  is  one 
of  the  glories  of  modern  literature,  and  his  argument  is  not  based  on  guesses.  He  invokes 
the  weighty  authority  of  Charles  F.  Dupuis,  whose  three  monumental  works,  The  Origin 
of  Constellations,  The  Origin  of  Worship  and  The  Chronological  Zodiac,  are  marvels  of 
meticulous  research.  Dupuis  placed  the  origin  of  the  zodiac  as  far  back  as  15,000  B.C., 
which  would  give  the  world's  oldest  picture  book  an  antiquity  of  17,000  years.  (This 
estimate  is  not  as  excessive  as  it  might  at  first  appear,  since  the  American  ast5ronomer 
and  mathematician,  Professor  Arthur  M.  Harding,  traces  back  the  origin  of  the  zodiac  to 
about  26,000  B.C)  In  discussing  star  worship  and  idolatry,  Volney  gives  the  following 
glowing  description  of  the  scientific  achievements  of  the  ancient  Ethiopians,  and  of  how 
they  mapped  out  the  signs  of  the  zodiac  on  the  star-spangled  dome  of  the  heavens: 

Should  it  be  asked  at  what  epoch  this  system  took  its  birth,  we  shall 
answer  on  the  testimony  of  the  monuments  of  astronomy  itself,  that  its 
principles  appear  with  certainty  to  have  been  established  about  seventeen 
thousand  years  ago,  and  if  it  be  asked  to  what  people  it  is  to  be  attributed, 
we  shall  answer  that  the  same  monuments,  supported  by  unanimous 
traditions,  attribute  it  to  the  first  tribes  of  Egypt;  and  reason  finds  in  that 
country  all  the  circumstances  which  could  lead  to  such  a  system;  when  it 
finds  there  a  zone  of  sky,  bordering  on  the  tropic,  equally  free  from  the 
rains  of  the  equator  and  the  fogs  of  the  north;  when  it  finds  there  a  central 
point  of  the  sphere  of  the  ancients,  a  salubrious  climate,  a  great  but 
manageable  river,  a  soil  fertile  without  art  or  labor,  inundated  without 
morbid  exhalations,  and  placed  between  two  seas  which  communicate 
with  the  richest  countries;  it  conceives  that  the  inhabitant  of  the  Nile, 
addicted  to  agriculture  from  the  facility  of  communications,  to  astronomy 
from  the  state  of  his  sky,  always  open  to  observation,  must  have  been  the 
first  to  pass  from  the  savage  to  the  social  state;  and  consequently  to  attain 
the  physical  and  moral  sciences  necessary  to  civilized  life. 

It  was,  then,  on  the  borders  of  the  upper  Nile,  among  a  black  race  of  men, 
that  was  organized  the  complicated  system  of  the  worship  of  the  stars, 
considered  in  relation  to  the  productions  of  the  earth  and  the  labors  of 
agriculture.  ...  Thus  the  Ethiopian  of  Thebes  named  stars  of  inundation,  or 


Aquarius,  those  stars  under  which  the  Nile  began  to  overflow;  stars  of  the 
ox  or  bull,  those  under  which  they  began  to  plow,  stars  of  the  lion,  those 
under  which  that  animal,  driven  from  the  desert  by  thirst,  appeared  on  the 
banks  of  the  Nile;  stars  of  the  sheaf,  or  of  the  harvest  virgin,  those  of  the 
reaping  season;  stars  of  the  lamb,  stars  of  the  two  kids,  those  under  which 
these  precious  animals  were  brought  forth.  ...  Thus  the  same  Ethiopian 
having  observed  that  the  return  of  the  inundation  always  corresponded 
with  the  rising  of  a  beautiful  star  which  appeared  towards  the  source  of  the 
Nile,  and  seemed  to  warn  the  husbandman  against  the  coming  waters,  he 
compared  this  action  to  that  of  the  animal  who,  by  his  barking,  gives 
notice  of  danger,  and  he  called  this  star  the  dog,  the  barker  (Sirius).  In  the 
same  manner  he  named  the  stars  of  the  crab,  those  where  the  sun,  having 
arrived  at  the  tropic,  retreated  by  a  slow  retrograde  motion  like  the  crab  of 
Cancer.  He  named  stars  of  the  wild  goat,  or  Capricorn,  those  where  the 
sun,  having  reached  the  highest  point  in  his  annuary  tract,  . . .  imitates  the 
goat,  who  delights  to  climb  to  the  summit  of  the  rocks.  He  named  stars  of 
the  balance,  or  Libra,  those  where  the  days  and  nights  being  equal,  seemed 
in  equilibrium,  like  that  instrument;  and  stars  of  the  scorpion,  those  where 
certain  periodical  winds  bring  vapors,  burning  like  the  venom  of  the 
scorpion.  (Volney's  Ruins  of  Empires,  pp.  120-122,  New  York,  1926) 

The  traditions  concerning  Memnon  are  interesting  as  well  as  instructive.  He  was  claimed 
as  a  king  by  the  Ethiopians,  and  identified  with  the  Pharaoh  Amunoph  or  Amenhotep,  by 
the  Egyptians.  A  fine  statue  of  him  is  located  in  the  British  Museum,  in  London.  Charles 
Darwin  makes  a  reference  to  this  statue  on  his  Descent  of  Man  which  is  well  worth 
reproducing:  "When  I  looked  at  the  statue  of  Amunoph  III,  I  agreed  with  two  officers  of 
the  establishment,  both  competent  judges,  that  he  had  a  strongly  marked  Negro  type  of 
features."  The  features  of  Akhnaton  (Amennhotep  IV),  are  even  more  Negroid  than  those 
of  his  illustrious  predecessor.  That  the  earliest  Egyptians  were  African  Ethiopians 
(Nilotic  Negroes),  is  obvious  to  all  unbiased  students  of  oriental  history.  Breasted's  claim 
that  the  early  civilized  inhabitants  of  the  Nile  Valley  and  Western  Asia  were  members  of 
a  Great  White  Race,  is  utterly  false,  and  is  supported  by  no  facts  whatsoever.  A  similar 
racial  bias  is  shown  by  Elliot  Smith  in  his  work,  The  Ancient  Egyptians  and  Their 
Influence  Upon  the  Civilization  of  Europe,  p.  30,  New  York  &  London,  1911.  "Not  a  few 
writers,"  says  he,  "like  the  traveler  Volney  in  the  18th  century,  have  expressed  the  belief 
that  the  ancient  Egyptians  were  Negroes,  or  at  any  rate  strongly  Negroid.  In  recent  times 
even  a  writer  so  discriminating  as  Ripley  usually  is  has  given  his  adhesion  to  this  view." 
(The  writers  referred  to  here,  are  Count  Volney,  the  French  Orientalist  and  Professor 
William  Z.  Ripley,  of  Harvard  University,  an  eminent  American  Anthropologist.) 
Professor  Smith  is  convinced  that  these  men  are  wrong,  because  he  holds  that  there  is  a 
"profound  gap  that  separates  the  Negro  from  the  rest  of  mankind,  including  the 
Egyptian."  (Ancient  Egyptians,  p.  74.)  Another  English  scholar,  Philip  Smith,  is  far  more 
rational  in  discussing  this  point: 

No  people  have  bequeathed  to  us  so  many  memorials  of  its  form 
complexion  and  physiognomy  as  the  Egyptians.  ...  If  we  were  left  to  form 


an  opinion  on  the  subject  by  the  description  of  the  Egyptians  left  by  the 
Greek  writers  we  should  conclude  that  they  were,  if  not  Negroes,  at  least 
closely  akin  to  the  Negro  race.  That  they  were  much  darker  in  coloring 
than  the  neighboring  Asiatics;  that  they  had  their  frizzled  either  by  nature 
or  art;  that  their  lips  were  thick  and  projecting,  and  their  limbs  slender, 
rests  upon  the  authority  of  eye-witnesses  who  had  traveled  in  the  country 
and  who  could  have  had  no  motive  to  deceive.  . . .  The  fullness  of  the  lips 
seen  in  the  Sphinx  of  the  Pyramids  and  in  the  portraits  of  the  kings  is 
characteristic  of  the  Negro.  (The  Ancient  History  of  the  East,  pp.  25-26, 
London,  1881.) 

We  read  of  Memnon,  King  of  Ethiopia,  in  Greek  mythology,  to  be  exact  in  Homer's  Iliad, 
where  he  leads  an  army  of  Elamites  and  Ethiopians  to  the  assistance  of  King  Priam  in  the 
Trojan  War.  His  expedition  is  said  to  have  started  from  the  African  Ethiopia  and  to  have 
passed  through  Egypt  on  the  way  to  Troy.  According  to  Herodotus,  Memnon  was  the 
founder  of  Susa,  the  chief  city  of  the  Elamites.  "There  were  places  called  Memnonia," 
asserts  Professor  Rawlinson,  "supposed  to  have  been  built  by  him  both  in  Egypt  and  at 
Susa;  and  there  was  a  tribe  called  Memnones  at  Moroe.  Memnon  thus  unites  the  eastern 
with  the  western  Ethiopians,  and  the  less  we  regard  him  as  an  historical  personage  the 
more  must  we  view  him  as  personifying  the  ethnic  identity  of  the  two  races."  (Ancient 
Monarchies,  Vol.  I,  Chap.  3.)  The  ancient  peoples  of  Mesopotamia  are  sometimes  called 
the  Chaldeans,  but  this  is  inaccurate  and  confusing.  Before  the  Chaldean  rule  in 
Mesopotamia,  there  were  the  empires  of  the  Sumerians,  Akkadians,  Babylonians  and 
Assyrians.  The  earliest  civilization  of  Mesopotamia  was  that  of  the  Sumerians.  They  are 
designated  in  the  Assyrio-Babylonian  inscriptions  as  the  black-heads  or  black-faced 
people,  and  they  are  shown  on  the  monuments  as  beardless  and  with  shaven  heads.  This 
easily  distinguishes  them  from  the  Semitic  Babylonians,  who  are  shown  with  beards  and 
long  hair.  From  the  myths  and  traditions  of  the  Babylonians  we  learn  that  their  culture 
came  originally  from  the  south.  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson  concluded  from  this  and  other 
evidence  that  the  first  civilized  inhabitants  of  Sumer  and  Akkad  were  immigrants  from 
the  African  Ethiopia.  John  D.  Baldwin,  the  American  Orientalist,  on  the  other  hand, 
claims  that  since  ancient  Arabia  was  also  known  as  Ethiopia,  they  could  have  just  as  well 
come  from  that  country.  These  theories  are  rejected  by  Dr.  II.  R.  Hall,  of  the  Dept.  Of 
Egyptian  &  Assyrian  Antiquities  of  the  British  Museum,  who  contends  that  Mesopotamia 
was  civilized  by  a  migration  from  India.  "The  ethnic  type  of  the  Sumerians,  so  strongly 
marked  in  their  statues  and  reliefs,"  says  Dr.  Hall,  "was  as  different  from  those  of  the 
races  which  surrounded  them  as  was  their  language  from  those  of  the  Semites,  Aryans,  or 
others;  they  were  decidedly  Indian  in  type.  The  face-type  of  the  average  Indian  of  today 
is  no  doubt  much  the  same  as  that  of  his  Dravidian  race  ancestors  thousands  of  years  ago. 
. . .  And  it  is  to  this  Dravidian  ethnic  type  of  India  that  the  ancient  Sumerian  bears  most 
resemblance,  so  far  as  we  can  judge  from  his  monuments.  ...  And  it  is  by  no  means 
improbable  that  the  Sumerians  were  an  Indian  race  which  passed,  certainly  by  land, 
perhaps  also  by  sea,  through  Persia  to  the  valley  of  the  Two  Rivers.  It  was  in  the  Indian 
home  (perhaps  the  Indus  valley)  that  we  suppose  for  them  that  their  culture  developed.  . . . 
On  the  way  they  left  the  seeds  of  their  culture  in  Elam.  . . .  There  is  little  doubt  that  India 
must  have  been  one  of  the  earliest  centers  of  human  civilization,  and  it  seems  natural  to 


suppose  that  the  strange  un-Semitic,  un-Aryan  people  who  came  from  the  East  to  civilize 
the  West  were  of  Indian  origin,  especially  when  we  see  with  our  own  eyes  how  very 
Indian  the  Sumerians  were  in  type."  {The  Ancient  History  of  the  Near  East,  pp.  173-174, 
London,  1916.)  Hall  is  opposed  in  his  theory  of  Sumerian  origins  by  Dr.  W.  J.  Perry,  the 
great  anthropologist,  of  the  University  of  London.  "The  Sumerian  stories  or  origins 
themselves  tell  a  very  different  tale,"  Perry  points  out,  "for  from  their  beginnings  the 
Sumerians  seem  to  have  been  in  touch  with  Egypt.  Some  of  their  early  texts  mention 
Dilmun,  Magan  and  Meluhha.  . . .  Dilmun  was  the  first  settlement  that  was  made  by  the 
god  Enki,  who  was  the  founder  of  Sumerian  civilization.  ...  Magan  was  famous  among 
the  Sumerians  as  a  place  whence  they  got  diorite  and  copper,  Meluhha  as  a  place  whence 
they  got  gold.  Dilmun  has  been  identified  with  some  place  or  other  in  the  Persian  Gulf, 
perhaps  the  Bahrein  Islands,  perhaps  a  land  on  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Gulf.  ...  In  a  late 
inscription  of  the  Assyrians  it  is  said  that  Magan  and  Meluhha  were  the  archaic  names  for 
Egypt  and  Ethiopia,  the  latter  being  the  south-western  part  of  Somaliand  that  lay 
opposite."  {The  Growth  of  Civilization,  pp.  60-61,  2nd  Edition,  Harmondsworth, 
Middlesex,  England,  1937,  Published  by  Penguin  Books,  Ltd.) 

Another  great  nation  of  Ethiopian  origin  was  Elam,  a  country  which  stretched  from  the 
Tigris  River  to  the  Zagros  Mountains  of  Persia.  Its  capital  was  the  famous  city  of  Susa, 
which  was  founded  about  4,000  B.C.,  and  flourished  from  that  date  to  its  destruction  by 
Moslem  invaders  about  the  year  650  C.E.  (Christian  Era).  In  speaking  of  the  Elamites,  H. 
G.  Wells  H.  H.  Johnston,  to  have  been  Negroid  in  type.  There  is  a  strong  Negroid  strain 
in  the  modern  people  of  Elam."  {Outline  of  History,  p.  166.)  Archaeological  evidence 
favors  this  view.  Reginald  S.  Poole,  the  English  Egyptologist  noted  that:  "There  is  one 
portrait  of  an  Elamite  (Cushite)  king  on  a  vase  found  at  Susa;  he  is  painted  black  and  thus 
belongs  to  the  Cushite  race."  (Quoted  by  Professor  Alfred  C.  Haddon,  in  his  History  of 
Anthropology,  p.  6,  London,  1934.  Thinker's  Library  Edition,  published  by  Watts  &  Co., 
5  &  6  Johnson's  Court,  Fleet  St.,  London,  E.  c-4,  England.) 

We  cannot  devote  much  space  to  the  early  inhabitants  of  India,  though  they  were  beyond 
all  doubt  an  Ethiopic  ethnic  type.  They  are  described  by  Professor  Lynn  Thorndike  as 
"short  black  men  with  almost  Negro  noses."  {Short  History  of  Civilization,  p.  227,  New 
York,  1936.)  Dr.  Will  Durant  pictures  these  early  Hindus  as  "a  dark-skinned,  broad-nosed 
people  whom,  without  knowing  the  origin  or  the  word,  we  call  Dravidians."  {Short 
History  of  Civilization,  Part  I,  p.  396,  New  York,  1935.)  The  student  is  advised  to  consult 
pp.  650-666,  of  the  new  edition  of  Sir  John  A.  Hammerton's  Wonders  of  the  Past,  in 
which  there  is  an  instructive  article,  with  fine  illustrations,  by  S.  G.  Blaxland  Stubbs, 
entitled:  Wonder  Cities  of  Most  Ancient  India.  That  Mr.  Stubbs  is  a  candid  writer  may  be 
seen  from  the  following  excerpt: 

The  early  Aryan  literature  of  India,  the  Hymns  of  the  Rigveda,  which,  it  is 
commonly  agreed,  date  from  about  1,000  B.C.,  speak  of  the  people  whom 
the  proud  Aryan  invaders  found  in  India  as  black-skinned  barbarians, 
Dasas  or  slaves.  But  Aryan  pride  of  race  has  received  something  of  a 
shock  from  archaeological  investigations  carried  out  by  Sir  John  Marshall 
and,  more  recently,  by  Dr.  E.  Mackay  in  the  valley  of  the  Indus.  Here 


ample  evidence  has  been  found  of  a  race  whose  complex  civilization  and 
high  culture  were  equal,  and  in  some  respects  superior  to  those  of  early 
Mesopotamia  and  Egypt. 

These  Asiatic  black  men  were  not  confined  to  the  mainland,  for  we  are  informed  by  no 
less  an  authority  than  Sir  Harry  H.  Johnston,  that: 

In  former  times  this  Asiatic  Negro  spread,  we  can  scarcely  explain  how, 
unless  the  land  connections  of  those  days  were  more  extended,  through 
Eastern  Australia  to  Tasmania,  and  from  the  Solomon  Island  to  New 
Caledonia  and  even  New  Zealand,  to  Fiji  and  Hawaii.  The  Negroid 
element  in  Burma  and  Annam  is,  therefore,  easily  to  be  explained  by 
supposing  that  in  ancient  times  Southern  Asia  had  a  Negro  population 
ranging  from  the  Persian  Gulf  to  Indo-China  and  the  Malay  Archipelago. 
(See  An  Introduction  to  African  Civilizations,  by  Willis  N.  Huggins.  Ph.D. 
and  John  G.  Jackson,  pp.  188-190,  New  York,  1937.) 

Most  readers  of  history  know  about  the  Celts,  ancient  inhabitants  of  Europe,  whose 
priests  were  known  as  the  Druids.  It  is  generally  thought  that  these  Celts  were 
Caucasoids,  but  Sir  Godfrey  Higgins,  after  much  study  came  to  the  conclusion  that  they 
were  a  Negroid  people.  Higgins  wrote  a  ponderous  volume  entitled  The  Celtic  Druids.  In 
the  following  passage  from  his  Anacalypsis  he  modestly  refers  to  it  as  an  essay:  "In  my 
essay  on  the  Celtic  Druids,  I  have  shown  that  a  great  nation  called  Celtae,  of  whom  the 
Druids  were  the  priests,  spread  themselves  almost  over  the  whole  earth,  and  are  to  be 
traced  in  their  rude  gigantic  monuments  from  India  to  the  extremity  of  Britain.  The 
religion  of  Buddha  of  India  is  well  known  to  have  been  very  ancient."  (Higgins  is  here 
referring  to  the  first  Buddha,  who  is  supposed  to  have  lived  between  5,000  and  6,000 
years  ago,  and  not  to  Gautama  Buddha  who  lived  about  600  years  B.C.  There  were  at 
least  ten  Buddhas  mentioned  in  the  sacred  books  of  India.)  "Who  these  can  have  been  but 
the  early  individuals  of  the  black  nation  of  whom  we  have  been  treating  I  know  not,  and 
in  this  opinion  I  am  not  singular.  The  learned  Maurice  says  Cuthies  (Cushites),  i.e.  Celts, 
built  the  great  temples  in  India  and  Britain,  and  excavated  the  caves  of  the  former;  and 
the  learned  mathematician,  Reuben  Burrow,  has  no  hesitation  in  pronouncing  Stonehenge 
to  be  a  temple  of  the  black  curly-headed  Buddha."  {Anacalypsis,  Vol.  I,  Book  I,  Chap. 
IV,  New  York,  1927.) 

Though  it  is  generally  believed  that  Columbus  discovered  America,  it  is  now  definitely 
known  to  students  of  American  archaeology  that  Columbus  came  late.  Professor  Leo 
Weiner  has  written  a  three  volume  work,  Africa  and  the  Discovery  of  America,  in  which 
he  argues  that  the  New  World  was  discovered  by  Africans  long  before  the  time  of 
Columbus.  Professor  Weiner  was  led  to  this  conclusion  partly  from  the  following 
evidence: 

1.  African  works  in  American  Indian  languages. 

2.  Vases  and  pipe-bowls  found  in  the  ruins  of  the  Mound-Builders,  showing 
Negro  faces  on  their  surfaces. 


3.  The  presence  of  African  foods  in  America,  such  the  peanut  and  the  yam. 

4.  The  totemic  organization  of  the  Amerindians  tribes,  very  similar  to 
African  totemism.  (Totemism  is  a  sort  of  primitive  theory  of  evolution. 
For  instance,  certain  tribes  are  divided  into  clans,  and  each  clan  is,  as  a 
rule  named  after  some  species  of  animal.  Let  us  suppose  a  tribe  is  divided 
into  four  clans,  bearing  the  following  names:  (1)  eagle,  (2)  Bear,  (3)  Crow 
and  (4)  Wolf.  A  member  of  the  Bear  Clan  will  consider  himself  as 
descended  from  bears,  a  member  of  the  Wolf  Clan  will  tell  you  that  he  is  a 
wolf  and  that  all  of  his  ancestors  were  wolves,  and  so  on;  this  clan 
ancestor  being  known  as  the  Totem.  There  are  numerous  definitions  of 
totemism,  the  best  I  have  come  across  being  the  following  one  by 
Professor  A.  VB.  Haddon:  "Totemism,  as  Dr.  Frazer  and  I  understand  it  in 
its  fully  developed  condition,  implies  the  division  of  a  people  into  several 
totem  kins,  or  as  they  are  usually  termed,  totem  clans,  each  of  which  has 
one  or  sometimes  more  that  one  totem.  The  totem  is  usually  a  species  of 
animal,  sometimes  a  species  of  plant,  occasionally  a  natural  object  or 
phenomenon,  very  rarely  a  manufactured  article.  . . .  The  totems  are 
regarded  as  kinsfolk  or  protectors  of  the  kinsmen,  who  respect  them  and 
refrain  from  killing  and  eating  them.  There  is  thus  a  recognition  of  mutual 
rights  and  obligations  between  the  members  of  the  kin  and  their  totem. 
The  totem  is  the  crest  of  symbol  of  the  Kin."  We  see  vestiges  of  totemism 
in  our  political  organizations;  for  example,  the  Democratic  DONKEY  and 
the  republican  ELEPHANT.  Baseball  clubs  present  an  even  better  example 
of  totemistic  atavism;  for  instance,  who  has  not  heard  of  baseball  teams 
bearing  such  names  as:  tigers,  cardinals,  bears,  bees,  bisons,  etc.) 
Weiner's  theories  have  not  been  kindly  received  by  his  colleagues. 
Professor  H.  J.  Spinden  sneers  sarcastically  in  the  following  condensed 
extract  from  Culture,  the  Diffusion  Controversy,  pp.  53-54,  New  York, 
1927: 

"Professor  Weiner  solves  the  riddle  of  old  American  civilizations 
with  an  Arabico-Mandingo  lexicon  and  derives  everything  of 
importance  in  the  New  World  from  the  highly  civilized  coast  of 
Gambia  and  Sierra  Leone.  From  brightest  Africa  came  the 
principal  American  food  plants,  the  Mayan  calendar  and  the 
Mexican  religion.  It  may  be  added  that  Professor  Weiner  swarms 
his  Negroes  across  the  Atlantic  in  no  less  than  fifty  voyages  before 
Columbus." 

The  Indian  was  not  the  original  American.  Professor  Ales  Hrdlicka  of  the  Smithsonian 
Institution,  as  authority  on  the  Amerinds,  contends  that  the  ancestors  of  the  Indians  came 
from  Asia  via  Bering  Strait  10,000  years  ago.  American  civilization  is  older  than  that. 
The  ruins  of  Tiahuanaco,  in  Bolivia,  according  to  Dr.  Rudolph  Muller,  a  noted  German 
astronomer,  are  between  10,000  and  14,000  years  old.  The  remains  of  this  ancient  city 
show  that  it  was  inhabited  by  a  highly  civilized  people.  (See  an  article  entitled  "The 
Oldest  City  in  the  World,"  by  A.  H.  Verrill,  in  the  N.  Y.  Herald-Tribune  Magazine,  July 


31,  1932.)  Excavations  in  Mexico  have  produced  equally  startling  results.  Dr.  Maximus 
Neumayer,  a  distinguished  Brazilian  archaeologist,  in  cooperation  with  a  group  of 
Mexican  archaeologists,  has  made  a  very  thorough  study  of  the  pyramids  and  monuments 
in  the  vicinity  of  Mexico  City.  He  estimates  the  monument  of  Cuicuilco  to  be  about 
13,000  years  old.  An  interesting  feature  of  this  structure  is  that  it  resembles  the  Assyrio- 
Babylonian  type  of  architecture,  bearing  a  striking  resemblance  to  the  Tower  of  Babel  as 
it  has  been  restored  by  the  Assyriologists.  Dr.  Neumayer  also  examined  the  pyramids  of 
Teotihuacan,  which  he  estimates  to  be  4,500  years  of  age.  He  thinks  that  these  pyramids 
were  built  by  a  people  akin  to  the  Egyptians;  and  from  their  arrangement,  suggests  that 
they  form  a  sort  of  model  of  the  solar  system,  with  a  pedestal  in  the  center,  representing 
the  sun.  We  must  also  mention  the  discoveries  of  Professor  Ramon  Mena,  Curator  of  the 
Department  of  Archaeology  of  the  Mexican  Government.  This  scientist  explored  the 
ruins  of  the  great  city  of  Palenque,  and  concluded  that  the  ancient  metropolis  was  built 
over  10,000  years  ago.  He  also  found  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  were  familiar  with 
the  manufacture  and  use  of  Stucco.  The  celebrated  French  archaeologist,  Desiree 
Charnay,  unearthed  statues  around  Mexico  City,  more  than  fifty  years  ago,  with  faces 
showing  Negroid  features.  Pictures  of  some  of  them  may  be  seen  in  Ignatius  Donelley's 
Atlantis,  pp.  174-175.  Donnelly  also  has  illustrations  of  two  similar  statues,  one  from 
Palenque  and  the  other  from  Vera  Cruz.  Finding  that  the  Indians  show  both  Mongoloid 
and  Negroid  ethnic  traces,  Charnay  justly  concluded  that  the  Amerinds  were  a  mixed  race 
of  both  Asiatic  and  African  ancestry.  (See  The  Ancient  Cities  of  the  New  World,  by 
Desiree  Charnay.)  We  have  perfectly  reliable  proof  of  the  presence  of  men  of  the 
Ethiopian  race  in  pre-Columbian  America.  Father  Roman,  one  of  he  first  Catholic 
missionaries  to  arrive  in  the  New  World,  records  that  a  tribe  of  black  men  came  from  the 
south  and  landed  in  Haiti,  and  that  they  were  armed  with  darts  of  guanin  (a  composition 
of  gold,  silver  and  copper),  and  were  known  as  the  black  Guaninis.  "These  might  have 
been  the  Negroes  of  Quareca,  mentioned  by  Peter  Martyr  d  Angleria,  or  some  other 
American  Negro  nation,"  asserts  De  Roo,  "the  like  of  which  there  were  many,  as  we  may 
see  in  Rafinesque's  Account  of  the  Ancient  Black  Nations  of  America.  Such  are  the 
Charruas  of  Brazil,  the  black  Carabees  of  St.  Vincent  in  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  the  Jamassi 
of  Florida,  the  dark  complexioned  Californians  who  are  perhaps  the  dark  men  mentioned 
in  the  Quiche  traditions  and  by  some  old  Spanish  adventures.  Such,  again,  is  the  tribe  of 
which  Balboa  saw  some  representatives  in  his  passage  of  the  Isthmus  of  Darien  in  the 
year  1513.  It  would  seem  from  the  expressions  made  use  of  by  Gomara,  that  these  were 
Negroes."  {History  of  America  Before  Columbus,  pp. 306-307,  by  P.  De  Roo, 
Philadelphia  and  London,  1900.)  Spanish  and  Portugese  explorers  found  colonies  of 
black  men  on  the  eastern  coasts  of  South  and  Central  America,  and  in  Yucatan  and 
Nicaragua.  De  Roo  quotes  John  T.  Short,  author  of  The  North  Americans  of  Antiquity, 
New  York,  1880,  on  the  similarity  of  African  and  American  languages,  as  follows — "It  is 
worthy  of  note  that  several  eminent  scholars  have  observed  the  remarkable  similarity  of 
grammatical  structure  between  the  Central  American  and  certain  transatlantic  languages, 
especially  the  Basque  and  some  of  the  languages  of  Western  Africa."  {History  of  America 
Before  Columbus,  pp.  164-165.) 

Most  of  us  are  familiar  with  the  Mayan  civilization  of  Yucatan  and  Central  America, 
since  American  archaeologists  have  devoted  many  years  of  intensive  research  to  these 


territories.  Among  the  speculations  concerning  the  origin  of  this  culture,  those  of 
LePlongeon  and  Raquena  are  the  most  valuable.  Professor  Rafael  Requena,  a  Venezuelan 
archaeologist,  holds  that  there  was  once  an  island  in  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  of  continental 
dimensions,  known  to  the  ancients  as  Atlantis,  that  this  island  was  settled  by  Egyptians, 
who  in  turn  established  colonies  in  America  before  the  submergence  of  Atlantis.  The 
findings  of  Professor  Augustus  LePlongeon  are  of  great  interest.  This  Franco-American 
archaeologist  discovered  the  ruins  of  a  palace  in  Chichen  Itza  in  1 874.  He  found  in  this 
structure,  known  as  Prince  Coh's  Palace,  pictographs  and  inscriptions  which  he  was  able 
to  decipher.  The  story,  as  unraveled  by  LePlongeon,  may  be  read  by  the  student  in  Queen 
Moo  and  the  Egyptian  Sphinx,  where  the  professor  gives  his  interpretation  of  the 
inscriptions  and  reproductions  of  the  pictographs.  Mrs.  LePlongeon's  work,  Queen  Moo's 
Talisman,  might  also  be  consulted.  The  story  runs  roughly  as  follows: 

About  1 1,000  years  ago,  two  brothers  Princes  of  Yucatan,  sought  the  hand 
of  the  ruling  monarch  of  the  land,  Queen  Moo,  in  marriage.  The  brothers 
were  named  Coh  and  Aac,  respectively.  Prince  Coh  was  the  successful 
suitor;  which  so  enraged  Prince  Aac  that  he  stabbed  his  brother  through 
the  heart  with  a  stone  knife,  which,  needless  to  say,  caused  his  death.  Then 
Aac  attempted  to  force  Queen  Moo  to  wed  him.  The  Queen,  rather  than 
submit,  decided  to  flee  to  Atlantis.  On  reaching  the  coast  she  learned  that 
great  earthquakes  had  submerged  Atlantis  beneath  the  sea;  so  she  sailed 
for  Africa  instead,  and  ended  her  journey  in  Egypt.  There  she  was  hailed 
as  Queen,  and  erected  the  Sphinx  as  a  memorial  to  her  slain  husband. 

The  foregoing  story  sounds  like  a  fable,  but  there  is  probably  a  core  of  fact  in  it.  If  the 
Sphinx,  with  its  Ethiopian  face,  is  a  memorial  to  an  ancient  Mayan  prince,  it  shows  that 
the  Mayas  were  of  African  origin. 

Where  flows  the  river  Nile, 
The  queen  found  rest; 

There  once  again  her  days 
With  peace  were  blessed. 

Did  Moo  a  giant  Sphinx  from 
Out  of  the  ground 

Cause  to  arise,  and 
Thus  Coh's  fame  renew? 

Did  she  immortalize 
Her  consort  true?" 
{Queen  Moo's  Talisman,  p.  65,  by  Alice  D.  LePlongeon.) 

That  Atlantis  was  connected  with  the  history  of  ancient  Ethiopia  there  can  be  little  doubt. 
The  Greek  philosopher,  Proclus,  stated  in  his  works  that  he  could  present  evidence  that 
Atlantis  at  one  time  actually  existed.  He  cited  as  his  authority  The  Ethiopian  History  of 
Marcellus.  In  referring  to  Ethiopian  history  to  prove  the  existence  of  Atlantis,  Proclus 
plainly  infers  that  Atlantis  was  a  part  of  Ethiopia.  (See  Cory's  Ancient  Fragments  of  the 
Phoenician,  Carthaginian,  Babylonian,  Egyptian  and  Other  Authors,  London,  1876.  See 


also,  Maynard  Shipley's  New  Light  on  Prehistoric  Cultures  and  Bramwell's  Lost 
Atlantis.)  Although  there  is  scientific  evidence  that  an  island  of  continental  dimensions 
once  existed  in  what  is  now  the  middle  of  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  many  students  of  the 
problem  of  Atlantis  have  located  it  in  other  parts  of  the  globe,  particularly  in  Central 
America  and  Africa.  Count  deProrok  ways  that  Atlantis,  in  the  dimness  of  antiquity, 
covered  the  region  now  occupied  by  the  Sahara  Desert.  Kirchmaier  placed  it  in  South 
Africa  and  Froebenius  in  West  Africa.  In  reviewing  James  Bramwell's  Lost  Atlantis,  Mr. 
Lewis  Gannett  states  that:  "The  German  anthropologist  Frobenius  definitely  locates  it  in 
Nigeria,  whose  ancient  civilization  he  relates  to  that  of  the  Etruscans  and  the  Assyrians." 
{New  York  Herald-Tribune,  Mar.  3,  1938.)  Doctor  Froebenius  found  ruins  of  palaces, 
terra  cotta  fragments  and  beautiful  statuary  in  Jorubaland,  a  district  in  Nigeria  between 
the  Niger  River  and  the  Atlantic  Ocean;  and  he  heard  among  the  Jorubians  legends  of  an 
ancient  royal  city  and  its  palace  with  walls  of  gold,  which  in  the  long  ago  had  sunk 
beneath  the  waves.  The  German  scholar,  Eugen  Georg,  is  a  keen  student  of  the  Atlantis 
question,  and  the  following  remarks  of  his  are  worthy  of  our  attention: 

The  new  age  that  began  after  the  disappearance  of  Atlantis  was  marked  at 
first  by  the  world-wide  dominance  of  Ethiopian  representatives  of  the 
black  race.  They  were  supreme  in  Africa  and  Asia  . . .  and  they  even 
infiltrated  through  Southern  Europe.  . . .  During  the  present  era — that  is  the 
last  10,000  years — the  white  race... has  come  to  possess  the  world. 
According  to  the  occult  tradition,  Semitic  peoples  developed  wherever  the 
immigrating  white  colonists  from  the  north  were  subjugated  by  the  black 
ruling  class,  and  inter-mixture  occurred,  as  in  oldest  Egypt,  Chaldea, 
Arabia  and  Phoenicia."  {The  Adventure  of  Mankind,  by  Eugen  Georg,  pp. 
121-122,  New  York,  1931.) 

So  far  we  have  given  little  or  no  attention  to  the  evidence  of  comparative  religion.  The 
study  of  ancient  religious  history  is  important,  for  religion,  like  philosophy,  changes  but 
slowly.  Institutional  religion,  being  conservative  and  static  in  its  outlook,  has  preserved 
much  ancient  lore  that  would  have  otherwise  been  lost  to  the  modern  student.  The  Greek 
philosopher  Xenophanes  (572-480  B.C.),  pointed  out  a  profound  truth  when  he  observed 
that  the  gods  men  worship  very  closely  resemble  the  worshippers.  In  the  words  of  this 
ancient  sage:  "Each  man  represents  the  gods  as  he  himself  is.  The  Ethiopian  as  black  and 
flat-nosed  the  Thracian  as  red-haired  and  blue-eyed;  and  if  horses  and  oxen  could  paint, 
they  would  no  doubt  depict  the  gods  as  horses  and  oxen."  This  being  the  case;  when  we 
find  the  great  nations  of  the  world,  both  past  and  present,  worshipping  black  gods,  then 
we  logically  conclude  that  these  peoples  are  either  members  of  the  black  race,  or  that  they 
originally  received  their  religion  in  toto  or  in  part  from  black  people.  The  proofs  are 
abundant.  The  ancient  gods  of  India  are  shown  with  Ethiopian  crowns  on  their  heads. 
According  to  the  Old  Testament,  Moses  first  met  Jehovah  during  his  sojourn  among  the 
Midianites,  who  were  an  Ethiopian  tribe.  We  learn  from  Hellenic  tradition  that  Zeus,  king 
of  the  Grecian  gods,  so  cherished  the  friendship  of  the  Ethiopians  that  he  traveled  to  their 
country  twice  a  year  to  attend  banquets.  "All  the  gods  and  goddesses  of  Greece  were 
black,"  asserts  Sir  Godfrey  Higgins,  "at  least  this  was  the  case  with  Jupiter,  Baccus, 
Hercules,  Apollo,  Ammon.  The  goddesses  Benum,  Isis,  Hecate,  Diana,  Juno,  Metis, 


Ceres,  Cybele  were  black."  (Anacalypsis,  Vol.  I,  Book  IV,  Chap.  I.)  Even  the  Romans, 
who  received  their  religion  mainly  from  the  Greeks,  admitted  their  debt  to  Egypt  and 
Ethiopia.  This  may  be  well  illustrated  by  the  following  passage  from  The  Golden  Ass  or 
Metamorphosis,  by  Apuleius.  The  author,  as  an  initiate  of  the  Isis  cult  is  represented  as 
being  addressed  by  that  goddess:  "I  am  present;  I  who  am  Nature,  the  parent  of  things, 
queen  of  all  the  elements  . . .  the  primitive  Phrygians  called  me  Press imunitica,  the  mother 
or  the  gods;  the  native  Athenians,  Ceropian  Minerva;  the  floating  Cyprians,  Paphian 
Venus  ...  the  inhabitants  of  Eleusis,  the  ancient  goddess  Ceres.  Some  again  have  invoked 
me  as  Juno,  others  as  Bellona,  others  as  Hecate,  and  others  Rhamnusia;  and  those  who 
are  enlightened  by  the  emerging  rays  of  the  rising  sun,  the  Ethiopians,  Ariians  and 
Egyptians,  powerful  in  ancient  learning,  who  reverence  by  divinity  with  ceremonies 
perfectly  proper,  call  me  by  my  true  appellation,  Queen  Isis."  (Doane's  Bible  Myths, 
Note,  p.  478.) 

A  study  of  the  images  of  ancient  deities  of  both  the  Old  and  New  Worlds  reveal  their 
Ethiopic  origin.  This  is  noted  by  Kenneth  R.  H.  Mackezie  in  T.  A.  Buckley's  Cities  of  the 
Ancient  World,  p.  180:  "From  the  wooly  texture  of  the  hair,  I  am  inclined  to  assign  to  the 
Buddha  of  India,  the  Fuhi  of  China,  the  Sommonacom  of  the  Siamese,  the  Zaha  of  the 
Japanese,  and  the  Quetzalcoatl  of  the  Mexicans,  the  same,  and  indeed  an  African,  or 
rather  Nubian,  origin."  Most  of  these  black  gods  were  regarded  as  crucified  saviors  who 
died  to  save  mankind  by  being  nailed  to  a  cross,  or  tied  to  a  tree  with  arms  outstretched  as 
if  on  a  cross,  or  slain  violently  in  some  other  manner.  Of  these  crucified  saviors,  the  most 
prominent  were  Osiris  and  Horus  of  Egypt,  Krishna  of  India,  Mithra  of  Persia, 
Quetazlcoatl  of  Mexico,  Adonis  of  Babylonia  and  Attis  of  Phrygia.  Nearly  all  of  these 
slain  savior-gods  have  the  following  stories  related  about  them:  They  are  born  of  a  virgin, 
on  or  near  Dec.  25th  (Christmas);  their  births  are  heralded  by  a  star;  they  are  born  either  in 
a  cave  or  stable;  they  are  slain,  commonly  by  crucifixion;  they  descend  into  hell,  and  rise 
from  the  dead  at  the  beginning  of  Spring  (Easter),  and  finally  ascend  into  heaven.  The 
parallels  between  the  legendary  lives  of  these  pagan  messiahs  and  the  life  of  Jesus  Christ 
as  recorded  in  the  Bible  are  so  similar  that  progressive  Bible  scholars  now  admit  that 
stories  of  these  heathen  Christs  have  been  woven  into  the  life-story  of  Jesus.  (These 
remarkable  parallels  are  discussed  and  interpreted  in  a  pamphlet,  Christianity  Before 
Christ,  by  John  G.  Jackson,  New  York,  1938.) 

The  late  Mr.  Maynard  Shipley,  President  of  The  Science  League  of  America,  made  a  very 
scholarly  study  of  the  various  mythologies  and  religions  of  the  world,  and  in  the 
concluding  passage  of  a  brilliant  essay,  Christian  Doctrines  in  Pre-Christian  America,  he 
offers  a  profoundly  thought-provoking  statement: 

That  the  ancient  pagan  creeds,  legends  and  myths — part  of  the  universal 
mythos — should  be  found  embodied  in  the  religion  of  the  ancient 
Mexicans,  and  that  all  these  again  are  found  to  be  but  the  original  sources 
of  the  modern  orthodox  Christian  religion,  is  by  no  means  inexplicable, 
and  need  not  be  attribute  to  the  subtlety  of  the  Ubiquitous  Devil.  The 
explanation  is  that  all  religions  and  all  languages  of  the  civilized  races  of 
men  had  a  common  origin  in  an  older  seat  of  civilization. 


Where  that  original  center  of  culture  was  is  another  story. 

The  evidence  seems  to  show  that  the  "original  center  of  culture,"  referred  to  by  Mr. 
Shipley,  was  that  vast  domain  known  to  the  classical  geographers  and  historians  as 
Ethiopia.  A  study  of  religious  images  throws  much  light  on  this  early  civilization.  The  tau 
(T-shaped)  cross  is  thought  by  many  Christians  to  be  a  unique  emblem  of  their  faith.  The 
fact  is  that  this  cross  is  of  ancient  Ethiopian  origin.  In  the  words  of  an  outstanding  student 
of  symbolism:  "The  Ethiopic  form  of  the  tau  is  an  exact  prototype  of  the  conventional 
Christian  cross;  or,  to  state  the  fact  in  its  chronological  relation,  the  Christian  cross  is 
made  in  the  exact  image  of  the  Ethiopian  tau."  (Sex  Symbolism.  P.  9,  by  William  J, 
Fielding,  Little  Blue  Book  No.  904.)  The  cross  was  known  to  all  the  great  ancient 
nations,  and  was  sometimes  shown  with  the  image  of  a  man  upon  it.  The  Church  Father, 
Minucius  Felix,  writing  in  the  early  part  of  the  third  century,  severely  rebukes  the  Pagans 
for  their  adoration  of  crosses:  "I  must  tell  you  that  we  neither  adore  crosses  nor  desire 
them;  you  it  is  ye  Pagans  ...  for  what  else  are  your  ensigns,  flags  and  standards,  but 
crosses  gilt  and  beautiful.  Your  victorious  trophies  not  only  represent  a  cross,  but  a  cross 
with  a  man  upon  it."  Commenting  on  the  preceding  extract,  the  American  scholar,  T.  W. 
Doane,  notes  that: 

It  is  very  evident  that  this  celebrated  Christian  Father  alludes  to  some 
Gentle  mystery,  of  which  the  prudence  of  his  successors  has  deprived  us. 
When  we  compare  this  with  the  fact  that  for  centuries  after  the  time 
assigned  for  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ,  he  was  not  represented  as  a  man  on  a 
cross,  and  that  the  Christians  did  not  have  such  a  thing  as  a  crucifix,  we 
are  inclined  to  think  that  the  effigies  of  a  black  or  dark-skinned  crucified 
man,  which  were  to  be  seen  in  many  places  in  Italy  even  during  the  last 
century,  may  have  had  something  to  do  with  it.  (Bible  Myths,  p.  197,  7th 
Edition.) 

The  same  writer  also  refers  to  "the  Mexican  crucified  god  being  sometimes  represented 
as  black,"  and  that  "crosses  were  also  found  in  Yucatan,  as  well  as  Mexico,  with  a  man 
upon  them."  (Ibid.,  p.  201.) 

The  numerous  black  madonnas  and  infants  in  European  cathedrals  are  discussed  in  detail 
by  Sir  Godfrey  Higgins  in  The  Anacalypsis,  Vol.  I,  Book  JV,  Chap.  I,  to  which  the 
interested  student  is  referred.  However,  the  remarks  of  Mr.  Shipley  on  this  point  are 
worthy  of  our  attention: 

Very  suggestive  is  the  fact  that  representations  of  the  virgin  mother  and 
infant  savior  are  often  black.  This  is  true  in  the  case  of  the  paintings  and 
images  of  Isis  and  Horus,  of  Devaki  and  Krishna,  and  in  many  cases  of 
Mary  and  Jesus.  The  most  ancient  pictures  and  statues  in  Italy  and  other 
parts  of  Europe,  which  are  adored  by  the  faithful  as  representations  of  the 
Virgin  Mary  and  the  infant  Jesus,  reveal  the  infant  draped  in  white,  but 
with  face  black  and  in  the  arms  of  a  black  mother.  . . .  How  does  it  happen 
that  the  Virgin  Mother  of  the  Mexican  Savior-God  so  closely  resembled 


the  Black  Virgins  of  Egypt  and  Europe?  Had  they  not  all  a  common 
origin?"  (Sex  and  The  Garden  of  Eden  Myth,  pp.  50-51,  by  Maynard 
Shipley,  Little  Blue  Book  No.  1 188.)  Mr.  A.  H.  Verrill,  an  American 
archaeologist,  visited  an  Indian  shrine  in  a  small  town  in  Guatemala  a  few 
years  ago,  and  found  that  on  a  special  festival  day  Indians  traveled  to  this 
little  church  to  bow  down  to  the  image  of  a  Black  Christ.  From  the 
attendant  ceremonies,  Verrill  judged  the  rite  to  be  of  Mayan  origin,  (see 
Verrill's  Old  Civilizations  of  the  New  World,  New  York,  1938.)  The 
Mayas  possessed  knowledge  of  the  arts  and  sciences  equivalent  to  that  of 
the  ancients  of  the  Old  World,  but  upon  that  we  cannot  dwell,  since 
limitations  of  space  forbid  it.  The  reader  is  referred  to  Professor  Paul 
Radin's  fine  book  on  the  American  Indians,  where  after  surveying  the 
marvelous  scientific  achievements  of  the  Mayas  of  Yucatan  and  Central 
America  ,  Dr.  Radin  admits  that:  "No  excavations  have  ever  revealed  to  us 
any  civilization  of  a  simpler  nature  from  which  this  very  elaborate  culture 
could  possibly  have  been  developed."  (The  Story  of  the  American  Indian, 
p.  77,  Garden  City,  1937.)  Egypt  and  Western  Asia  tell  the  same  story.  "In 
each  case  we  have  a  standard  or  measuring-rod  of  authentic  historical 
record,"  declares  Samuel  Laing,  "of  certainly  not  less  than  8,000  and  more 
probably  9,000  or  10,000  years,  from  the  present  time;  and  in  each  case 
we  find  ourselves  at  this  remote  date,  in  the  presence,  not  of  rude 
beginnings,  but  of  a  civilization  already  ancient  and  far  advanced.  We 
have  populous  cities,  celebrated  temples,  an  organized  priesthood,  an 
advanced  state  of  agriculture  and  of  the  industrial  and  fine  arts;  writing 
and  books  so  long  known  that  their  origin  is  lost  in  myth;  religions  in 
which  advanced  philosophical  and  moral  ideas  are  already  developed; 
astronomical  systems  which  imply  a  long  course  of  accurate  observations. 
How  long  this  prehistoric  age  may  have  lasted,  and  how  many  centuries  it 
may  have  taken  to  develop  such  a  civilization,  from  the  primitive 
beginnings  of  Neolithic  and  Paleolithic  origins,  is  a  matter  of  conjecture. 
All  we  can  infer  is,  that  it  must  have  required  an  immense  time,  much 
longer  than  that  embraced  by  the  subsequent  period  of  historical  record." 
(Human  Origins,  by  Samuel  Laing,  p.  30,  London,  1913.) 

Much  more  could  be  said  on  this  subject,  but  since  this  essay  is  addressed 
mainly  to  readers  who  have  little  time  for  the  study  of  history,  it  must  be 
made  as  concise  as  possible.  The  numerous  citations  from  standard 
scientific  and  historical  works,  it  is  hoped,  will  be  of  some  benefit  to 
students  who  are  out  of  reach  of  large  public  libraries,  or  who  lack  the 
leisure  time  necessary  for  reading  and  research  along  these  lines.